Hi Chairs,
i support the new plan.
regards
SteveF
On 8 October 2012 22:02, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>
> Recently, the Chairs of the HTML Working Group proposed a plan to bring
> HTML5 to Recommendation by 2014. This plan was created in consultation with
> W3C Management and key leaders of the W3C Accessibility community. The plan
> has been discussed and the Chairs have revised it based on feedback. At
> this time, the Chairs propose to adopt this plan by consensus.
>
> Because the plan includes many specific aspects, we explicitly enumerate
> what the Working Group would be agreeing to in passing this Call for
> Consensus; and what matters will require separate future Working Group
> Decisions. Please carefully review what this CFC does and does not include
> before replying.
>
> If the HTML Working Group passes this Call for Consensus, then the Working
> Group shall:
> * Endorse sending the plan as a whole as input to the W3C to guide
> revisions to the HTML Working Group charter: <
> http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/html5-2014-plan.html>
> * Agree in principle to advance HTML5 to Candidate Recommendation without
> another Last Call (but this is not yet the actual CR resolution since that
> will require a specific draft).
> * Make a WG Decision to adopt Version 3 of the HTML Working Group Decision
> Policy: <http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy-v3.html>
> (A summary of the changes is available here: <
> http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/html5-2014-plan.html#dp> and here
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Aug/0188.html>)
> * Make a WG Decision to adopt the Model CR Exit Criteria (Public
> Permissive version 3) as the CR exit criteria for HTML5 and the default CR
> exit criteria for other Working Group deliverables: <
> http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/public-permissive-exit-criteria.html
> >
> * Make WG Decisions to pursue each of HTML Working Group issues 30, 164,
> 185, 194, 195, 200, 203, and 206 as extension specifications, with the
> possibility of reintegration into HTML 5.0, 5.1, or 5.2 per the
> reintegration policy.
> (Details on each of these issues can be found here: <
> http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/html5-2014-plan.html#issues>)
> * Agree in principle that extension specifications can be integrated in
> HTML 5.0 if they meet the CR exit criteria and have HTML WG consensus, in
> accordance with the reintegration policy outlined in Version 3 of the HTML
> Working Group Decision Policy
> * Make a WG Decision to amend to the HTML Accessibility Task Force Work
> Statement to allow the Task Force to create extension specs for
> accessibility-related issues, as follows: <
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Oct/0016.html>
> NOTE: to take effect, this amendment must also be approved by the
> Protocols & Formats Working Group, and the Task Force itself.
> * Include hgroup in the list of at-risk features for HTML5.
> * Agree to rename the "HTML5 spec" component to "HTML spec", and only
> bring back specific bugs that address interoperability issues or can be
> addressed by a non-substantive change to the specification
>
> This Call for Consensus does not include any decisions beyond the points
> above, and in particular explicitly does *not* include any of the
> following, which will be separate future WG decisions:
> * Request transition of HTML 5.0 to Candidate Recommendation in Q4 2012
> (to be decided once a CR draft is prepared).
> * Request publication of a First Public Working Draft for HTML 5.1 in Q4
> 2012 (to be decided once a draft is prepared).
> * Request publication of a First Public Working Draft for any extension
> specifications (to be decided when and if drafts are ready.)
> * Request any other future transitions for HTML 5.0, HTML 5.1, or any
> other specification that are proposed in the plan (all to be decided when
> and if the relevant drafts are available).
> * Adopt any further revisions to the HTML Accessibility Task Force Work
> Statement beyond the amendment above.
> * Adopt a full list of features at risk, beyond the specific inclusion of
> hgroup (to be decided once a complete list is available; the W3C Process
> requires the list of at-risk features to be finalized before CR).
>
>
> If you have any comments or concerns about this CfC, please respond by
> Monday, October 15th, 2012. Positive response is preferred and encouraged
> and silence will be considered as agreement with the proposal.
>
> If your comment is an objection, please clearly state that. In accordance
> with the W3C Process, objections SHOULD cite substantive arguments and
> propose changes that would remove the objection.
>
>
> Regards,
> Maciej Stachowiak
> (on behalf of the HTML Working Group co-Chairs, Paul Cotton, Sam Ruby, and
> Maciej Stachowiak
>
>